I am a woman born 1949 and my quest is to find a mindmate
to grow old together as a mutually devoted couple
in a relationship based upon the
egalitarian rational commitment paradigm
bonded by intrinsic commitment
as each other's safe haven and secure basis.

The purpose of this blog is to enable the right man
to recognize us as reciprocal mindmates and
to encourage him to contact me:

The entries directly concerning,
who could be my mindmate,
are mainly at the beginning.
If this is your predominant interest,
I suggest to read this blog in the same order
as it was written, following the numbers.

I am German, therefore my English is sometimes faulty.

Maybe you have stumbled upon this blog not as a potential match.
Please wait a short moment before zapping.

Do you know anybody, who could be my mindmate?
Your neighbour, brother, uncle, cousin, colleague, friend?
If so, please tell him to look at this blog.
While you have no reason to do this for me,
a stranger, maybe you can make someone happy, for whom you care.

Do you have your own webpage or blog,
which someone like my mindmate to be found probably reads?
If so, please mention my quest and add a link to this blog.

Sunday, September 2, 2012

583. Paradise And Instinctivity

583.   Paradise And Instinctivity

When I attended a christian kindergarten, I perceived all stories told indiscriminately as fairy tales, no matter if the were Grimm's or from the bible.  

The story of how Eve and Adam lost their paradise was one of those fairy tales.   But rationally seen, their garden Eden was certainly not the perfect paradise.   Had it been, they would have owned it, instead of having a narcissistic landlord, who imposed authoritarian rules upon them and who had the power to kick them out in the case of the lack of compliance and submission.

Putting aside the landlord part of the story, it is mainly an interesting myth of how millennia ago people imagined the ideal circumstances for a happy life.   Filling gaps in my knowledge of the story with a few assumptions, experiencing the garden Eden as a paradise implies Eve and Adam as having been a happy bonded couple having sufficient propinquity.    For a mismatched couple, it could logically not have been a paradise.     

The essence of the happiness of Eve and Adam and their good life while residing in the garden of Eden can be explained by one decisive distinguishing factor:

The definition of a paradise includes the absence of harm caused by instincts and all instincts causing harm.     

The garden Eden supplied Eve and Adam with all resources for survival and freed them from any necessity to depend on others.  There was no danger requiring others for protection.   No competition for scarce resources brought out the worst of male instincts in Adam.

  • Procreation instinct

    They were childfree, they were not harmed by the consequences of the procreation instinct.   They did not need to produce children for the purpose of being cared for when old.

  • Sexual instinct

    They either were free from sexual instincts or their needs were balanced and symmetrical.  There were only the two of them, therefore their sexuality was entirely focused upon each other, without any disturbance or interference from others, not by disruptive comparisons, nor was there any alternative available to monogamy by either cheating, poligamy or ruthless dumping and replacing. 
    The entire garden Eden was their private home.    They were able to be naked without any involuntary triggering of the instincts of or by strangers.   Adam's instincts were not triggered by other women, Eve was not at risk of being objectified by triggering other men's instincts.

  • Hierarchy instinct

    There was nobody to compete or even fight with for a higher place in a hierarchy.  Adam was free to be a nice, caring, considerate guy.  He had not reason to be or to learn to be aggressive and dominant, nor had he any reason for risky behaviors.  
    He had no need for the hierarchy instinct.  There were neither other men to deprived of resources or of women.   There were no other women to be taken away from other men.   Adam had no reason to be a jerk for the enhancement of his own reproductive success, both because of the absence of the procreation instinct and of the absence of targets.

  • Ingroup-outgroup instinct

    In the absence of any other people, there was neither an ingroup nor an outgroup. Adam was never in a situation desensitizing him become cruel and commit atrocities to outgroup members.  

  • Gregarious instinct

    They did not need a gregarious instinct attracting them to indiscriminately interact with other people, even with those being unpleasant or harming due to having nothing in common.  Without the need of exchanging of services, support and for protection, they were free to suffice to each other. 
    They had time to spend together and they were not too exhausted by hard labor for survival.    They were in a situation to have the time work on their relationship, to communicate, to create intellectual and emotional intimacy. 
    They were fully sensitive and perceptive to influence each other's behavior and treatment, because they were not deformed by instinct driven and desensitized persons as disruptive role models.  

It is very interesting to notice, that the myth of Eve and Adam in the garden of Eden clearly but implicitly describes a paradise free from instincts, yet to this very day, the damage caused by instincts is never explicitly recognized.   Whatever harm is caused by instincts is excused as if the instincts were not only the true human nature, but as if there was nothing wrong with being determined by instincts.   
It is overdue to redefine human nature by the primacy of cognition, and to start recognizing instincts as an obsolete nuisance, which needs to be controlled, whenever it causes harm to others.